Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
, to find a path to work. >> that's what the american public has said clearly in this last election they are tired of partisanship polarization. so we made an outreach. to the governor's credit we had meetings. they know when it came time to made make the leadership decision to say, okay, we can do more working together than dividing. i think he wanted to do it but, you know leadershipwise we have seen this happy happen over and over again. when the right-wing puts a bill up endings dues deductions limiting public bargaining rights lessening healthcare, lessening pensions the governor signs it. it's not on his agenda. >> he has to fall in line. right? >> yeah. >> let me play devil's advocate. those who are watching who may not be in a union, they might say in wisconsin and in michigan and in the last election labor attempted ballot proposals that were unsuccessful is there a different strategy this time? how can the message change to be relevant as you have tried to do here in this conversation to those who are not in the labor movement? what will be your nex
less than he offered before the election and also raises the money taken out of medicare and medicaid by $62 billion. how democrats or anybody could except that -- could accept that. the average folks here in america do not want to pay their fair share. they cannot argue the point that everybody has to give a little bit more to help us eliminate some of this debt and keep the country going in a positive direction. host: did you see the reaction from harry reid? caller: [laughter] host: let me read a portion of that. that is what the democratic leader in the senate had to say about yesterday's counterproposal put out by house republicans. we noted in this letter sent to the white house from the speaker also includes the signatures of paul ryan as well as eric cantor and the rest of his leadership team seems to be on board. here is the chairman of the republican study committee's statement. so here are the opening offers in "the washington post." time." there is the side-by-side in the "the washington times" this morning. a democratic caller, what do you think? caller: by listening at w
to stress the need for elected officials to act. for not only has the passage of time exacerbated some of the economic problems, it has revealed a perhaps equally-dangerous political one. our inability to grapple with pressing fiscal challenges represents nothing less than a crisis in our democratic order. compounding the instability and unpredictability in a volatile world. our propositions for this coalition are simple. the national security of the united states depends on its economic health. that health must be insured by averting the immediate crises and by laying the groundwork for a rigorous, long-term program of debt reduction, smart investment, economic growth and lower income inequality. in national security spending, we can target investments much more efficiently in response to threats that are evolving before our eyes. and resources need to be shifted toward nonmilitary elements of our national security posture. in the immediate term -- and by that i mean over the next four weeks -- we must avoid driving our country over the fiscal cliff. no partisan ideology is worth the
that president was in cambodia right after the election. he was in burma. secretary clinton moved widely throughout the region as does secretary panetta. and the amount of activities that i do and my forces do have been a prompt jump in what we've done in the past, and we're looking for opportunities to do more exercise. we're doing more of those things already. i think it's visible to our allies. i think it's visible to our partners. not to be invisible to the region. we also want to jump, where's the next summary our aircraft carrier, that's always the sake of. and we will, over time as you heard secretary panetta said, we will rebalance our navy towards the pacific, and i party mentioned in my opening remarks, we are rapidly moving our most capable assets in the region because of some of the ballistic missile defense will be facing of those types of things. so i think it's not about one thing. it's about a holistic approach, and what if you on the military side is only one aspect of a. it's got to be tied to what's happening in the economic side in what's happening in the diplomatic s
. >> you are okay with this. >> i hate it at princeton where i went. 155 faculty the last election gave to obama. two guys gave to romney. one was a janitor. one was a visiting lecturer. yet the education i got was very one-sided. that's the way it is. all we can do is speak out. >> bill: that's the difference between you and me. i don't want to accept it. i'm struggling for a way for the state to be fair to the taxpayer. and i think that there has to be some standards. >> there is a good way for that stop paying for any of this stuff. >> bill: then the poorer kids don't get to go to college. >> they would be so rich lots of charity. >> bill: you can't depend on that. >> tuition would be lower. >> bill: you say it would be lower but i don't think so. i think the reason the state university is in play is to give people who don't have a lot of money a chance to go to school because they can't afford princeton or harvard tuition. >> go free to prince to be, harvard. >> i don't all of this stuff is accepted. >> we are telling the truth and keeping those right wing people out. >> bill: even
a lot of leverage. i was a newly elected governor, i had a lot of political leverage and for various reasons i will not bore you with had the upper hand in the negotiations. i put the pedal to the metal. i won that round. however, the ill will that came from pushing to the other side was so strong that years later legislative leaders remembered how difficult that negotiation was and how unreasonable in their mind i was. we were still talking about payback six and seven years later in future negotiations. i share that -- as you think about not just this moment but the relationship between the congress and the president going forward. it is unclear whether there is enough republicans to support or even consider the rate increase generally, but at the very least i think they would want to see not just that question, but they would want to see what does it come with. i describe it as the two wings of the plane. people are working on one side, but not much discussion on the entitlement and structural spending reduction wing. republicans have put revenues on the table. there are lots of di
relationship, i don't think that that kind of thing -- >> what matters is japan does have election on the summer 16th. are they worried about china trying to put together a leader democracy in the region including india because that was his strategy that if you put together things, much more like your when you think, i know you can't in your position talk one way or another about prime minister but this notion about a strategic -- is japan really need to invest in structures that balance -- are you worried that given your experience you have to balance china much more vigorously than you did in the past? >> yes. most frequently you ask question for japanese people is whether we regard china as a threat or a chance for an hour and should is would like to see china development as a chance rather than threat. >> what you think will really happen? >> there is a assumption that china continues to be kind of international stakeholder, stakeholder, international community. international order and they respect the communication with the other countries. on the assumption i think we can wel
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)